February 09, 2012

Captain Ranty: Criminal

Deep joy.

I was wondering when, or indeed if, the Procurator Fiscal was ever going to write back in reply my challenge. You may recall that I asked a couple of simple questions, namely: can you provide Proof of Claim and Proof of Authority? Two straightforward questions and I anticipated two straightforward answers. (Actually, I was and am convinced they can never provide such proof).

To be honest, I really thought he would have written back to at least say "Load of crap, sonny, get your arse to court". Instead, I have heard nothing. Not a word. By pure chance, I did a search at the court and I discovered that I am listed as one of 85 criminals to be seen on Monday 13th February.

Sneaky, low-down, greasy, deceptive bastards.

As I sit here awaiting a response, they will no doubt hear the case in absentia. I never expected them to play fair, and I was right. Look at what passes for justice? The mind boggles. How many people do they screw every year? Probably millions. This captain is not for screwing. I will teach them that, at least.

It isn't that I am afraid of court, but all my research leads me to believe that court is a place where men (or women) arrive at only when they have failed to resolve their differences. I reckon the ball is still in play. The PF should, by now, have lobbed it back. He has not.

EDIT:  (Added to fully explain my stance)

Here is my main argument, I don't think I made it clear in the post: the last thing I received from the PF was the Citation. It gives a court date (13th Feb) but then lists the three ways of dealing with the citation.

1. Attend court personally

2. Arrange for your lawyer to attend

3. Write to the PF using the reply form and envelope provided. This should be done at least two days before 13 Feb 2012.

Now, as you all know, I responded on 17th January. I blogged it here.

I chose option 3.

Next thing I know, I find (by accident) that I am listed as a criminal and I am up before the JP at 10 am Monday!

Nowhere in the PFs citation does it state, "You may answer on the form provided but if we don't like the answer we will go ahead anyway".

Will they dispatch the bobbies to come and get me? My home is at least 1.5 hours away from the court so they better show up early to get me there by 10am.


As far as I am concerned, the PF is in dishonour. I never failed to answer a single one of his missives but when it suits him, he can ignore mine?

I don't bloody think so.

Whatever they do to me whilst I am not there on Monday will be contested bitterly. I will use fair means or foul to have my retribution.

Still, they may contact me in tomorrow's post, or even Saturdays.

I'll let you know.

CR.

36 comments:

Dan Capp said...

I was thinking to myself on the way home: These so-called misdemeanours they try to convince us are crimes; if we were criminals would they really be writing to us, when they get round to it, waiting a couple of weeks for our reply and then taking it to their next boring level?

No - a true criminal receives a quick, sharp visit (or raid) to their home and gets dragged away where they can no longer harm others.

Captain Ranty said...

Captain, trial in absentia is not permitted in Scotland unless it is on an unruly defendant under the criminal procedure Scotland act 1995 S153(1). It is however permitted in England. It is also worth noting that it is banned under common law.

Perhaps by failing to notify you of the hearing they were hoping to have a warrant granted for your arrest for non appearance!

EDITED at Pete's request.

Captain Ranty said...

Dan,

For some reason it really pissed me off that I am listed under the headline CRIMINALS.

I said some time ago that presumed innocence was now gone, but I never believed it until I saw that.

CR.

Steven said...

"No - a true criminal receives a quick, sharp visit (or raid) to their home and gets dragged away where they can no longer harm others."

Only in the Movies.

Ask Robert Green and Anne Greig about the raids on their homes.

Ranty; why not go to court and carry the fight from there? They won't be expecting that.

Steven UK said...

http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/8286244.___Officers_had_no_warrant_during_raid___/

Captain Ranty said...

Pete,

Edit done.

Thanks for that information.

Here is my main argument, I don't think I made it clear in the post: the last thing I received from the PF was the Citation. It gives a court date (13th Feb) but then lists the three ways of dealing with the citation.

1. Attend court personally

2. Arrange for your lawyer to attend

3. Write to the PF using the reply form and envelope provided. This should be done at least two days before 13 Feb 2012.

Now, as you all know, I responded on 17th January. I blogged it here.

I chose option 3.

Next thing I know, I find (by accident) that I am listed as a criminal and I am up before the JP at 10 am Monday!

Nowhere in the PFs citation does it state, "You may answer on the form provided but if we don't like the answer we will go ahead anyway".

Will they dispatch the bobbies to come and get me? My home is at least 1.5 hours away from the court so they better show up early to get me there by 10am.

CR.

Pete said...

Edited lol, it's vanished!

Captain Ranty said...

Steven,

"Ranty; why not go to court and carry the fight from there? They won't be expecting that."

For two reasons:

1. They have no jurisdiction and if I did show up, I am basically admitting that they do have jurisdiction.

2. They have not acted on my Notice. They are in dishonour, and if recent revelations about the "NAME" are entirely true, I will be in dishonour if I turn up to represent something that isn't mine.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Pete,

I had to delete the comment to make the edits and repost it. I cannot (and would never) post comments in your name.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Steven UK,

Thanks for the link. I remember seeing it before.

My jaw dropped then as well.

CR.

Oldrightie said...

Shits, bloody shits. Cowardly ones at that.

Captain Ranty said...

OR,

We are dealing with the spineless here.

BTW, I checked out the Scotland Act 1995 S153(1) and Pete is quite right. I must be present. There are exceptions in S150A but I do not think any of them apply to me.

CR.

Smoking Hot said...

Not exactly rosy here in England. Any letter sent by the courts is deemed received to whoever they send it to. No proof necessary ... if they say they sent it ... they say you received it ... period!

However when you send anything to them the same doesn't apply even if you send it recorded delivery or take it in personally and deliver it by hand.

They 'lost' both of the above in an action we were taking. We got round that and was waiting for a date of the hearing. We phoned and called in but no date had yet been set.

3 days after our last contact with the court (still no hearing date) we received a letter from the court ... hurray!

Opened the letter to find we'd lost because we didn't turn up to the hearing 10 days previously! l kid you not.

We were taking the HMRC to court. :)

Captain Ranty said...

SH,

The cheeky bastards!

How the fuck do they get away with it?

If they screw me over I am going to invent a whole new level of Awkward Bastardness.

CR.

Smoking Hot said...

Get this, we then had to apply to the judge who'd said we'd lost and ask his permission to re-hear the case. lt was totally at his discretion ... the missing letters and false information could not be used as an excuse ... an excuse? ffs!

So we changed our tactics and used a law firm to apply for us and basically act as a postal address. From then on we had no problems, no missing letters, direct communication with the court at all times.

HMRC? ... we won!

Representing yourself is fraught with pitfalls ... they have a closed-shop and what to keep it that way! Justice? ... no-ones interested!

Best of luck, mate!

Steven UK said...

Thanks for your answer CR. That clarifies it for me.

(and sorry to Dan Capp for my rather flipant initial comment)

Captain Ranty said...

SH,

I hear that they also say (when you are in court) "I see no such paperwork". It is right in front of them but turned upside down so all they "see" is the blank paper. This is why I add a 1p stamp and my autograph on the back of every page I expect to use in court.

I am hugely pleased that you won, and deeply saddened that you had to use a lawyer.

Word on the (Freeman) street is that if you use a lawyer you are declaring to the court that you are incompetent to handle your own affairs.

I imagine it was the BAR that came up with the axiom "the lawyer who represents himself in court has a fool for a client".

Thanks for the good wishes!

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Steven UK,

No problem.

As SH said, this game is rigged, and is littered with pitfalls.

CR.

Smoking Hot said...

We only used the lawyer for postal address, we instructed them and boy did we instruct them. HMRC then offered settlement before going to court ... rejected ... upped offer ... rejected ... upped offer .... accepted.

This was all against 'our' lawyers advice. They said we couldn't win at the very beginning and drop it. Then they advised us to accept every offer as they turned up. We 'instructed' them to do as we say.

Horses for courses CR :)

Leg-iron said...

So you only have to be accused to be a 'criminal' now? Once, you only earned that title after being convicted.

Then again, all of us are regarded as criminals all the time, these days.

Well, I have always done every job assigned to me to the best of my ability. Let them give me the job title of 'criminal' and see what bloody well happens.

It's almost certain since there'll be tobacco plants in my garden again this year.

Anonymous said...

what is the case listed as - what 'charge' ?

Chris

Captain Ranty said...

SH,

As I have said so many times, they are all in the same club.

That is why they advise you to roll over all the time.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Leggy,

On the site I am listed as "accused" and the sub-heading is CRIMINALS. Big, bold, capitalised lettering. Is it possible that a percentage of those 85 listed may not be guilty at all? I think so.

They can list me as a criminal all day long and forever more, AFTER they find me guilty.

Not that I care that a corrupt system would deem me guilty of anything. I hold them all in contempt.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Chris,

No charges are listed. Just names.

CR.

pitano1 said...

hi capt.

i was going to wish you good luck.

but as you know luck does not apply here.

so i will just say `congratulations`
to you`for not grasping your ankles`
for the criminal justus system.

i wont start preaching to the choir,but just add, with you 100%

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks mate!

I actually hope that they notify me by post that they fucked me while I wasn't looking. They ignored their own process and I will have any conviction quashed.

They are their own worst enemy.

CR.

pitano1 said...

indeed,their are many ways to skin a cat.
ps dont let yours read this if it is of a sensative nature,or does not like flash photography...LOL

Dan Capp said...

@Steven: I was speaking figuratively. Literally speaking, you're right. But we must ask why, if these contraventions of statute really are 'crimes', are we not dealt with like a real crime should be dealt with.

Crimes of loss, harm or injury should require immediate, direct attention... surely. Correspondence with the police force that often spans months keeps hundreds of thousands locked in the legal process and makes it seem normal for a large portion of the country to be in some stage of legal conviction. To me this screams of desensitisation, where we are being increasingly made to feel 'at home' with prosecution.

Anonymous said...

I bit off topic but here is a very interesting and thought provoking article
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/02/revolutionaries-best-way-to-tear-down.html

Best of luck CR

TB

dickie doubleday said...

just let em know captain as a freeman you choose as you go with regards to road saftey, and you aint got any jurisdiction over me anyway.

just add that if any loved one of mine gets killed because of speeding then i will expect the law to be enforced and i will completley regognise this court and it will have my full backing to convict the speeding driver .


sorted.

Steven UK said...

@ Dan Capp - yes I got where you were coming from but only after I made a hasty comment; hence my comment at 20:50 on 9th.

Alfie said...

Dem is some sneaky fucking wankers!!

Chris Elmes said...

Captain
With reguard to SH's post at 20:17 I've been stung by this one and have been moved to raise a couple of points on your blog,First however to put my points in context I remind you all of the following maxim "Let he who would be decived be decived". 1)The Police, prosicution and Courts ect: claim that documentation sent by first class is "deemed to have been served. In my case I had challenged a NIP for October served in January by Recorded delivery(outside the fourteen day deadline)in court the Prosicutor claimed that a NIP had been served within fourteen days by first class post and that the NIP By recorded dilivery was a courtesy. As I was focused on the fourteen day issue and the recorded delivery being three months out of date it threw my train of thought and I lost my case.Here is the mistake I made 2)In case Law apart from delivery by hand only Recorded Delivery or Registered Letter is irributtable, service by first or second class post is rebuttable. By not challenging(objecting)to the claim that first class post was sufficent I had efectively consented to the prosicuters position even though I had the right of it. They are using sheer cheek to bluf their way to a win and if you'r not swiched on it works

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks Chris.

I have read of several cases where they "win" on a technicality that should have seen the poor bugger should have walked away with no more being said or done.

The maxim you quote is a good one and I use it often.

This whole court appearance may be academic. They may have decided to use trickery back when they received my first notice. They have, however, stepped outside of the process and I really cannot see how they can convict now. I have done what they asked, but they have not responded. Under their own statutes they cannot rule in my absence.

I consistently state that I am not bound by their rules, but they are.

We will see.

CR.

Stealthy said...

Fk my old boots! If I ever had any doubts about how corrupt our pseudo-legal system is, those doubts have just gone straight to jail and have not passed GO! Big up's captain, Leggy and all the great comments ;)

nala said...

Hi cap'n, caught in the spin as we all are.
I have a couple of AUTHORITIES handy if you feel the need to peruse them,they deal with the elements of a CRIME.
I also have a copy of the JP bench hand book, some interesting points within, 1.91 raises a VERY interesting thought in my mind(warning, dae'ye want inside nalas hiedmmmmmmm)gie's'a'shout if ye'like.
nala